The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Religion & Philosophy

Jehovah's Witnesses - What do they really believe?

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...10 11 12
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#166New Post! Mar 19, 2012 @ 19:23:54
@MadCornishBiker Said

Where on earth do you get that from, or is it just your desperation talking?


No. I will explain this as simply as possible.

1. You said the JWs were getting more accurate with their Armageddon predictions, which shows that they are right.

2. I said this is actually retarded, because saying the world will end in 1874 or 1914, obviously 1914 is more accurate, as both dates are wrong.

3. I then pointed out that, after 1914, for the Jws to say the world will end after 1914, is more accurate again, as they were wrong about the world ending *in* 1914. So, when they said the world will end after 1914, this was necessarily true, as they said it *after* 1914. This says nothing at all about them hearing from God - it says a lot about them being continually wrong and changing their tune when they are found out as being undeniably wrong, but it says nothing about them hearing from God.

4. I then used an analogy and pointed out that if I got my grandmother's pet dog to vomit on a calendar from this year, and said the world will end before this date, that this would be *more* accurate than the JW predictions of 1874 and 1914.

5. I then inferred that, if this date turned out wrong, and I said after that date had passed, that the world will end after this date had passed, that this is more accurate than the date that turned out false.

6. I then concluded that this must be evidence of said dog hearing from God, according to your 'proof' of the JWs being 'right'. (And, if the world does not end this year, and I get the dog to vomit on next years calendar and say, "the world will end before this date," before this date - then, when the date passes, say, "the world will end after this date," that this shows the dog vomit predictions are getting even *more accurate*, and this is absolute proof (according to the JWs), that the dog's vomit is guided by God...

So, in summary, I was hoping that the inference may make you think, and you would realise the hopeless retardation of the JW position. But alas, this too has failed.

Now, if the logic of the proposition I have put to you here is faulty, please, by all means, point it out.

@MadCornishBiker Said
No, I am saying that they did the right thing in abandoning that rather silly idea, and the fact that they have "demonstrated repentance" for it by publicly turning away from it, means that it no longer has any relevance, and according to Christian forgiveness cannot be held against them.


But see, here's the problem, MCB. You hold aloft the abject failure of the JWs as proof that they are right.

So, they say, "the world will end in 1874." They are wrong. It doesn't. So they say, "the world will end before 1914." (and this is automatically, for the moment, a more accurate prediction than the first one, which has already proven 100% wrong) But again, they are wrong. The world does not end *before* 1914. So, they say, "the world will end after 1914." Now, this final statement is necessarily true - even if God is not real, the world will end at some point, as that is inevitable. So, in other words, their "predictions" are either totally wrong, or, necessarily true.

So, their predictions became more accurate, merely by them necessarily being more accurate, it had nothing to do with believing in God, let alone hearing from Him - as again, a dog vomiting on a calendar could do what the JWs did... do you get it now? The JW predictions, and what you infer from it, is retarded.






MCB, why do the JWs have a pyramid in their cemetery if idolatry is not one of their practices? Should Christians build statues of Tarot cards and so on? The JWs engaged in false, pagan practices like pyramid reading, and have a monument to pyramids. This kind of thing should bother a Christian.

The JWs also, as I point out repeatedly, make Jehovah the bible and 4 human witnesses liars by what they say. This too, should bother a Christian.

The JWs are wrong about the meaning of firstborn, as I have now clearly shown beyond doubt. It *can* mean "born first", but it does not when used in reference to both David and Ephraim, and, the context of its use by Paul regarding Christ, clearly shows that it is not speaking of Christ being the born first, but being preeminent.

And, once again, you have ignored my request to show where on the JW pamphlet about the trinity, they say the early church fathers are apostates.

So, for 8th time I ask, where on the anti-trinity pamphlet, do the JWs say that the early church fathers are apostate?

You *know* the JWs are liars. You *know* they lied on that pamphlet. The reason you do not point out where the JWs call them apostate, is because they do not call them apostate. They lie and misquote them to make it look like the do not support the trinity when all of them (except one) actually do. *AND* they lie by inferring that the JWs consider these guys Christian, when, according to you, the JWs think they are apostate.

Thus, the JWs actions are evil, and you know it. They are liars, and you know it. They are frauds, and you know it.

Their defense of the 'predictions' of the end are BS, and you know it.

I have done all I can to get you to open your eyes and see what is literally painful for others to behold. Now, I can safely say, 'you are without excuse.'
Teleologist On April 13, 2012




Phoenix,
#167New Post! Mar 19, 2012 @ 20:30:35
@MadCornishBiker Said

Get back under your bridge, lol, you know as well as I do that I have answered that question, it is your problem if you can't accept it. Christianity, as I have explained, is a matter of principle, not of law.


You keep answering questions I have not asked. I want to know why you are promoting a teaching that you admit you don't agree with. You believe that the command to "abstain from... blood" forbids taking whole blood or any components derived from whole blood, right? But your governing body teaches something different. Something not backed up by scripture but only their personal opinion. Yet, for some reason you have not explained, you think you are obligated to promote the personal opinion of 9 men in Brooklyn, New York when Jesus clearly warns us that our worship is in vain if we teach the commands of men. Matt.15:9

I'm sure you think that those that adhere to the Trinity doctrine because it is promoted by their church leaders are guilty of following the teachings of men in violation of what Jesus says at Matt.15:9. But at least most of those that support the Trinity believe it is true but you have admitted you think your governing body is wrong on this issue we are discussing but yet you still support them. How is this any different than someone coming to the conclusion that the Trinty doctrine is false but like you being afraid to challenge those in authority over them? And believing the Trinity doctrine doesn't cause persons to die prematurely. So you have the additional burden of standing bloodguilty before God.

You would do well to follow this advice from your governing body:
“If, after making an honest investigation, you are less than pleased with what you see, do more than just complain. . . . Church members . . . are responsible for what the church says and does. So ask yourself: Am I willing to share responsibility for everything my church says and does? . . . But your life depends upon being 100 percent sure. . . . Make your choice accordingly.” (Awake!, Sept. 8, 1987, pp. 19-11)
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#168New Post! Mar 19, 2012 @ 21:36:37
@Teleologist Said

You keep answering questions I have not asked. I want to know why you are promoting a teaching that you admit you don't agree with. You believe that the command to "abstain from... blood" forbids taking whole blood or any components derived from whole blood, right? But your governing body teaches something different. Something not backed up by scripture but only their personal opinion. Yet, for some reason you have not explained, you think you are obligated to promote the personal opinion of 9 men in Brooklyn, New York when Jesus clearly warns us that our worship is in vain if we teach the commands of men. Matt.15:9

I'm sure you think that those that adhere to the Trinity doctrine because it is promoted by their church leaders are guilty of following the teachings of men in violation of what Jesus says at Matt.15:9. But at least most of those that support the Trinity believe it is true but you have admitted you think your governing body is wrong on this issue we are discussing but yet you still support them. How is this any different than someone coming to the conclusion that the Trinty doctrine is false but like you being afraid to challenge those in authority over them? And believing the Trinity doctrine doesn't cause persons to die prematurely. So you have the additional burden of standing bloodguilty before God.

You would do well to follow this advice from your governing body:
“If, after making an honest investigation, you are less than pleased with what you see, do more than just complain. . .Church members . . . are responsible for what the church says and does . . So ask yourself: Am I willing to share responsibility for everything my church says and does? . . . But your life depends upon being 100 percent sure. . . . Make your choice accordingly.” (Awake!, Sept. 8, 1987, pp. 19-11)


Yes, that is quite true, I do answer questions you don't ask, but then you falsely accuse me of not answering ones that you do ask and I feel the additional answers are relevant to something you have said.

Been a little selective with your quote haven't you? Talk about taking things out of context. You are right about the edition of the Awake Magazine that your rather selectively trimmed quote comes from. You don't mention that the article was entitled "Future Prospects for Protestantism—And for You!" and is found on page 8 of that magazine.

The article is talking about the Lutheran Church, and gives reasons why, from first hand accounts, some have left that church and become Jehovah's witnesses. Not a very good choice of article for your argument is it? The accounts are in a box on page 10, and I will copy and paste it on the end of the main section from page 9.

I also notice that you chose an article not available online, lol, however I will risk the wrath of the Mods and exercise my right of reply by copying and pasting the relevant section of the article here, without commissions, lol since I have it all on disc.

If Your Church Fails to Act, Will You?

If, after making an honest investigation, you are less than pleased with what you see, do more than just complain. A journalist, while commenting on Karl Barth’s statement that a church is its members, logically concluded: “Church members . . . are responsible for what the church says and does.” So ask yourself: Am I willing to share responsibility for everything my church says and does? Can I really be proud of having all its members as spiritual brothers?
While considering these questions, do not overlook the significance of Revelation 18:4, 8. Speaking of the world empire of false religion, displeasing to God, it says: “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues . . . [for] her plagues [shall] come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.”
You may sincerely believe that your church is no part of false religion that God says he will soon destroy. But your life depends upon being 100 percent sure. Are you?
False religion has no future, nor do those who support it. True religion will last forever, along with those who practice it. Make your choice accordingly.


The box referred to in the previous line reads

[Box on page 11]
Former Lutherans Explain Why They Are Now Jehovah’s Witnesses
“What first impressed me about Jehovah’s Witnesses was the cleanliness and honesty I saw at one of their conventions. I encourage others to attend one to experience for themselves the genuine love among the Witnesses.”—W. R., former sexton.
“I attended church every Sunday. But the sermon, at most 20 minutes long, seldom answered my questions about the purpose of life or about life after death. Jehovah’s Witnesses gave me the answers right from the Bible, and I could talk to them on a person-to-person basis. More must be included in divine services than just responding to church bells every Sunday morning, singing songs, and listening to a sermon. No sincere searcher for truth can be satisfied with that! He wants to do something.”—E. B., former Sunday-school teacher.
“My activity as church elder never involved Biblical matters, only purely business matters. What helped me most was learning God’s name, Jehovah, a name I never heard mentioned at church. I was impressed with the multitude of truths contained in the Bible.”—E. M., former church elder.
“The first time Jehovah’s Witnesses spoke to me, the difference [between them and us] was apparent. That they wanted to talk to me about the Bible was totally new and strange. My first question was whether they were being paid for their work. They said no. My second question was whether they had fought during the war. They explained that many Witnesses had been in concentration camps. Finally, I had found persons willing, if necessary, to die for their faith.”—H. M., former sexton.
“When I asked my pastor to explain why every pastor had his own interpretation, he said: ‘Every pastor has the right to visualize God in the way that will permit Him to be put to the best use in the congregation.’ Later I took turns attending two different congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses. What struck me was the complete harmony between them. And the lectures contained such worthwhile material, always supported by Bible texts that you could immediately read from your own Bible! What a contrast to the many sermons I had heard!”—U. P., former church social worker and parish nurse.

And yes I do accept responsibility for the doctrine set by the Governing Body, because I accept their reasons for their decisions, and the love they show for the Brother hood they are shepherding. Most especially I know the love they have for God and for truth.

I also respect the fact that they trust the Brothers and Sisters to form good enough conscience to make an acceptable decision. They are there to guide their "sheep" not to enforce every little thing.

I support them because on the major, important doctrinal questions they are right, but Christians are, after all, under principle not law so they cannot legislate on every little detail, only guide. Only the Pharisaical are hung up on legislation.

As for disagreements, the answer is simple. I know who they are and what they are, God's representatives on earth so I know that if it is important enough God Himself will sort it out, as I trust Him to sort out my current unfortunate state.

The major thing is that unlike the adherents to the vast majority of churches I, and all JWs, follow Christ and God, not any man, even if that man be on the Governing Body.

So far,over the last , almost 30 years, they have never let me down in any important way. Their important doctrine has always been spot on in line with scripture, and I am not a Pharisee, being picky over the slightest little thing. And I am certainly not going to complain over them saying that maybe I can do something if my conscience allows it.

I suppose one of the things I respect about the JWs is they do not remove personal responsibility from religion. We are all responsible for our own "fate". No one else is, so they don't force feed us.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#169New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 09:37:16
@MadCornishBiker Said

Yes, that is quite true, I do answer questions you don't ask, but then you falsely accuse me of not answering ones that you do ask and I feel the additional answers are relevant to something you have said.


It is interesting that two people are debating you, and we both accuse you of the same thing; not answering questions.

However, now, I will ask you another question, one that I have not asked before. Do you have the spirit of Christ in you?
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#170New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 11:50:50
@bob_the_fisherman Said

It is interesting that two people are debating you, and we both accuse you of the same thing; not answering questions.

However, now, I will ask you another question, one that I have not asked before. Do you have the spirit of Christ in you?



And yet in both cases I have answered, just not the sort of answer that the two of you want.

It is hardly surprising that it is the two of you since both of you display a very similar Pharisaical attitude, both spending too much time "straining out the gnat but gulping down the camel" as Jesus would say.

Certainly not the attitude of a True Christian living under principle rather than law.

You for instance are rather obsessed with past mistakes that have been corrected and therefore no longer apply. Is that the attitude of one attempting to copy Christ who freely forgave anyone who turned their back on their error (sin is simply another word for error incidentally), even those who had broken the most seriously regarded laws (The woman with a flow of blood for instance, who had broken a very serous Law by even appearing in public, and then compounded it by actually having the temerity to touch Jesus!).

Judging by your attitude to God's people you would have been amongst those who condemned her fro two such serious infringements of Mosaic Law, which was still in force at that time, but did Jesus? No!

God will never open your eyes to the truth as long as you maintain such judgemental attitudes. Maybe that's why He opened mine as a child I had every reason to hate my adoptive father, not just because of how he was with me, but the way he treated my mother, the men who worked for him, and anyone he felt he had any influence over, but much as I hated what he did, I could never hate him, and more than once put my life at risk to protect him from his own stupidity
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#171New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 19:03:39
@MadCornishBiker Said

And yet in both cases I have answered, just not the sort of answer that the two of you want.


Of course you have not given the answer I want, as you have not answered my question.

I asked you where in the trinity pamphlet the JWs say the anti-Nicene fathers are apostate (as the way that pamphlet is written, these guys are held aloft as early Christians that repudiate the trinity doctrine).

Your response was, "If they teach the trinity, they are apostate."

This answer is not related to the question.

I accused the JWs of a specific, deliberate, systemic form of lie (misquoting people to make them appear to support the JW position when, in fact, those writers repudiate the JWs in the very text the JWs site as supportive of their heretical views).

You have not, cannot, and therefore, will not answer the question.

You are, I put it to you, running from truth as far and fast as you possibly can, and it is sad to watch from someone who attacks me and every other Christian as being liars. Only one of us is on the run from truth - and it isn't me.

@MadCornishBiker Said
It is hardly surprising that it is the two of you since both of you display a very similar Pharisaical attitude, both spending too much time "straining out the gnat but gulping down the camel" as Jesus would say.


And yet, I have barely even begun taking you to task for the lies you tell - yet. I am leaning toward altering that stance as time goes on, as I find your way of doing things reprehensible.

As one example; the JWs, as you would know, repudiate the bodily resurrection of Christ, and you dismiss it airily as though it is of no consequence.

Is it really of no consequence that the JWs call Christ a liar and false prophet?

Paul said, if Christ was not raised from the dead, our faith is in vain. Is the resurrection really such a small thing to JWs that they do not even care about the most fundamental points regarding it? Again, I put it to you that the reason you think the resurrection such a small inconsequential matter, is that you are no form of Christian, or, you know the JWs are liars, and are too scared to look at the truth.

However, God says to his people, that the one who speaks in God's name, and his prophecies do not come true - do not fear him, as he is not from me.

*Never* in the OT did God's people get prophesy wrong. Never, so far, have the JWs got it right. God is not a God of perpetual errors.


@MadCornishBiker Said
Certainly not the attitude of a True Christian living under principle rather than law.


Who is living under law. I accept that my salvation comes 100% by Grace through faith, and nothing I do can add to or subtract from it, as Christ accomplished it totally on the cross.

That is the Christian position, and yet you deny it all.

@MadCornishBiker Said
You for instance are rather obsessed with past mistakes that have been corrected and therefore no longer apply. Is that the attitude of one attempting to copy Christ who freely forgave anyone who turned their back on their error (sin is simply another word for error incidentally), even those who had broken the most seriously regarded laws (The woman with a flow of blood for instance, who had broken a very serous Law by even appearing in public, and then compounded it by actually having the temerity to touch Jesus!).


Compare your remarks here, you plead for compassion on the pagan past of the JWs, to your hate-filled diatribe against Christians. Consistency lacking much.

@MadCornishBiker Said
Judging by your attitude to God's people you would have been amongst those who condemned her fro two such serious infringements of Mosaic Law, which was still in force at that time, but did Jesus? No!


No, I would not have condemned her, as I condemn no one else. I have stated on TFS repeatedly that all humans sin, and that our flesh - our natural state, literally hates God, and that we are all sold as slaves to sin. The Christian is not better than the 'sinner' - the only difference being, the Christian accepts their need of Christ, and submits to him, and is filled with His Spirit in consequence. It is the Spirit of Christ in us, that saves us, not anything we do or do not do.

I have no right, therefore, to judge others.

I point a mirror at your organisation, and say, as you do, I will do it also to you. Or, as Christ would say maybe, "with the measure you use, I will measure it back to you."

However, again, I will state for the record that I am completely aware that I am far more lenient on the JWs than you and the JWs are toward Christians.

@MadCornishBiker Said
God will never open your eyes to the truth as long as you maintain such judgemental attitudes. Maybe that's why He opened mine as a child I had every reason to hate my adoptive father, not just because of how he was with me, but the way he treated my mother, the men who worked for him, and anyone he felt he had any influence over, but much as I hated what he did, I could never hate him, and more than once put my life at risk to protect him from his own stupidity


Do you agree with Paul that you hated God in your natural state?

And, yet again, you have failed to answer my question. Does the Spirit of Christ dwell in you?
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#172New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 20:41:47
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Of course you have not given the answer I want, as you have not answered my question.

I asked you where in the trinity pamphlet the JWs say the anti-Nicene fathers are apostate (as the way that pamphlet is written, these guys are held aloft as early Christians that repudiate the trinity doctrine).

Your response was, "If they teach the trinity, they are apostate."

This answer is not related to the question.

I accused the JWs of a specific, deliberate, systemic form of lie (misquoting people to make them appear to support the JW position when, in fact, those writers repudiate the JWs in the very text the JWs site as supportive of their heretical views).

You have not, cannot, and therefore, will not answer the question.

You are, I put it to you, running from truth as far and fast as you possibly can, and it is sad to watch from someone who attacks me and every other Christian as being liars. Only one of us is on the run from truth - and it isn't me.



And yet, I have barely even begun taking you to task for the lies you tell - yet. I am leaning toward altering that stance as time goes on, as I find your way of doing things reprehensible.

As one example; the JWs, as you would know, repudiate the bodily resurrection of Christ, and you dismiss it airily as though it is of no consequence.

Is it really of no consequence that the JWs call Christ a liar and false prophet?

Paul said, if Christ was not raised from the dead, our faith is in vain. Is the resurrection really such a small thing to JWs that they do not even care about the most fundamental points regarding it? Again, I put it to you that the reason you think the resurrection such a small inconsequential matter, is that you are no form of Christian, or, you know the JWs are liars, and are too scared to look at the truth.

However, God says to his people, that the one who speaks in God's name, and his prophecies do not come true - do not fear him, as he is not from me.

*Never* in the OT did God's people get prophesy wrong. Never, so far, have the JWs got it right. God is not a God of perpetual errors.




Who is living under law. I accept that my salvation comes 100% by Grace through faith, and nothing I do can add to or subtract from it, as Christ accomplished it totally on the cross.

That is the Christian position, and yet you deny it all.



Compare your remarks here, you plead for compassion on the pagan past of the JWs, to your hate-filled diatribe against Christians. Consistency lacking much.



No, I would not have condemned her, as I condemn no one else. I have stated on TFS repeatedly that all humans sin, and that our flesh - our natural state, literally hates God, and that we are all sold as slaves to sin. The Christian is not better than the 'sinner' - the only difference being, the Christian accepts their need of Christ, and submits to him, and is filled with His Spirit in consequence. It is the Spirit of Christ in us, that saves us, not anything we do or do not do.

I have no right, therefore, to judge others.

I point a mirror at your organisation, and say, as you do, I will do it also to you. Or, as Christ would say maybe, "with the measure you use, I will measure it back to you."

However, again, I will state for the record that I am completely aware that I am far more lenient on the JWs than you and the JWs are toward Christians.



Do you agree with Paul that you hated God in your natural state?

And, yet again, you have failed to answer my question. Does the Spirit of Christ dwell in you?


Yes, you point the mirror at the, the "mirror image" JWs and as with all mirror images what you show is the reverse of what is true.The JWs have nothign against Chriswrtians, they are the only true Christians, bgecvause they do not reduiate the bodily resurrection of Christ as nyou claim. They do show that tehre is some doubt as to whether or not he was resurrected in the originbal body, since no-one reciognsied him at first, but they do not dispute that he was resuerrected in a human body,

Again you tiewst thihgs to suit your own deistorted position.

The fact remains that nowhere does the bible support the trinity teaching, and even history does not support the trinity as a recognised Church teaching until late 4th century. Your own evidence showed that.

These are incontrovertible facts and that therefore means that all who teach them are Apostate teachers.

I am not going to get drawn further into time wasting arguments over a question I fell I have answered in a number of ways, but which you refuse to accept, just as you refuse to accept any evidence, not matter how much I show you, that the trinity teaching is false.

If you cannot accept my answers, fine, that is your choice but do not try to claim I have not answered the questions.

I have never criticised Christians for the very reasons that, as I have demonstrated fully no-one who teaches or supports the trinity teaching, or celebrates festivals with pagan origin like Christmas and Easter, has any right to call themselves Christian.

The very fact that you are so desperate to ignore the facts reveals that not only are you desperate, but that you know yourself that you are in the wrong, despite your words to the opposite.

Every time you have brought forward any scripture that you claim supports the trinity I have shown you how it cannot possibly do so.

What other evidence can you produce?

The supposed quotations from JW publication that appear on Apostate sites, you cannot produce the full text of any such publication to show the context and show that the claimed quote actually is such.

In future I will only discuss scriptural references with you. After all, both my beliefs and those ow th JWs are based on scripture so really that is the only evidence that counts for anything.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#173New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 20:49:05
@MadCornishBiker Said

In future I will only discuss scriptural references with you. After all, both my beliefs and those ow th JWs are based on scripture so really that is the only evidence that counts for anything.


That's ok - I already said you are running from truth. But now, things will get interesting. This statement will be kept by me for awhile, as I doubt you really want to do this.

But, anyway, let us begin...

Can you tell me please what 1 John 4:12 means?

And, for the third time, I ask, does the spirit of Christ dwell in you?
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#174New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 20:53:58
@MadCornishBiker Said

The supposed quotations from JW publication that appear on Apostate sites, you cannot produce the full text of any such publication to show the context and show that the claimed quote actually is such.



https://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/index.htm

The above is the link to the Jehovah's Witnesses official anti-trinity pamphlet, the very exact same one that I quoted two whole sections of, in their entirety, and asked you to point out where the JWs say the early church fathers are apostate.

MCB, if you are going to deny truth, try to be subtle. Lies of this magnitude cannot be taken seriously by anyone, and you do your credibility much harm.
Teleologist On April 13, 2012




Phoenix,
#175New Post! Mar 20, 2012 @ 22:29:11
@MadCornishBiker Said

The major thing is that unlike the adherents to the vast majority of churches I, and all JWs, follow Christ and God, not any man, even if that man be on the Governing Body.


That simply isn't true. You just got through saying that you view the men on your governing body as God's representatives on earth. So when they tell you to jump you say how high. That is why you will teach and promote a doctrine you admit you disagree with because you think it is wrong to challenge God's representatives on earth. But you obvious don't understand the plain words of Jesus at Matt.15:9. He tells us that our worship is in vain if we teach the commands of men as truth. He certainly doesn't say that we can avoid the responsiblity to determine whether or not a teaching is from God or from men just because a group of men claim they speak for God. If you are afraid to challenge your governing body on a false teaching because you think this group of men is closer to God than you are and who are you to dispute with God's representatives then you reject what Jesus tells you at Matt.15:9. You have yourself in the position of blindly following men and never being capable of determining when they are wrong.

This all ties in with the Watchtower quote I cited. The Watchtower is telling persons they have the responsibility to determine if the teachings of their church are based on the Bible and if they aren't then they should withdraw their support. But you seem to think JW's shouldn't follow this advice.


@MadCornishBiker Said
So far,over the last, almost 30 years, they have never let me down in any important way. Their important doctrine has always been spot on in line with scripture...


Well, that's obviously not true as you yourself think your governing body is wrong about allowing blood components. And despite my continuously asking, you refuse to give me any explanation as to why your governing body considers taking platelets to be a disfellowshipping offense but taking hemoglobin is a conscience matter.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...10 11 12

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Mon Jan 02, 2012 @ 11:57
3 744
New posts   Science
Mon Jan 18, 2010 @ 11:11
50 5151
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Fri Sep 11, 2009 @ 15:07
17 1052
New posts   Rants & Raves
Thu Aug 27, 2009 @ 17:59
14 6332
New posts   Religion
Fri Jul 03, 2009 @ 14:53
70 3988